The line that first jumped out at me isn’t a gender thing specifically, because
I could imagine it being written about a male actor:

Al Pacino’s acting in the movie was intentionally over the top, and he did it with a wink. Most of the cast seemed in on the joke — except for Katie. She was acting like she was in a dramatic Sundance indie, when it’s really just a typical cop movie.

… except that I doubt he’d be being castigated in comparison to a celebrated *female* actor rather than another, more celebrated than him, male one.

In tracking this link back down, I found this which is apparenly the article that kicked it off (which at least mentions it as a flop for Al Pacino). And this which says that a lot of what was in the THR article is bull, and written deliberately to diss Katie Holmes. It seems her part is actually very small, which again points up the illogic of calling it a Katie Holmes flop.

I found it depressing in the sense of when did winking at the camera and playing a part like you don’t take it seriously become a compliment? Surely Katie Holmes is the one who ought to be complimented here, for at least trying to deliver what she was paid for. But of course, she’s not a “Great Man.” Which probably also explains how the film doing badly can somehow be a Katie Holmes flop without also being an Al Pacino flop.

Also, apparently Brooke Mueller is “snubbing” Charlie Sheen by not visiting him in the hospital. No mention of the domestic violence against her that he was arrested for; though the article does see fit to mention that *he* is in the process of divorcing *her.*

From Scarlett:

Article about a schoolgirl who stomped on a gay man to death because she found him holding hands with his partner offensive.

SEED SOVEREIGNTY! The link’s to the text of the declaration and its reading by a group of young people.

From Scarlett:

I mentioned in my Underbelly article how disappointed it was to see no female bad guys in the ‘based-on-a-true-story’ crime drama; this is an article about a new series that follows two madams/organised crime Kingpins (Queenpins?) starting from the 1920’s.

Related

Comments

The Charlie Sheen article reminded me of something else I heard about him – that he was ‘generously’ paying for 1/3 of the wages of the TaaHM crew while filming stopped for the duration of his rehab. Apparantly he was ‘disappointed’ that the studio wasn’t ponying up.
Errr… filming stops because you’re in rehab for a drug problem that you have no-one but yourself to blame for, you expect the studio to keep paying for episodes that aren’t being filmed and you’re being *generous* but paying a THIRD of the crew’s wage? (And something tells me that a film crewperson’s wages isn’t so great that you can get by on a third of it…)

I always look forward to these links (even though most of them just make me angry). I have to admit I’m inclined to be dubious of anything in the Daily Mail, though. Not that I don’t think the schoolgirl story is true (’cause it doesn’t surprise me this sort of thing happens), but I’d be more inclined to believe the horrifying details if they came from a source less…full of fail.

I was dubious of the Daily Mail article too, but a quick Google found essentially the same facts being reported at the Guardian, which I feel is a little more reliable (except for its notorious typos, ‘couse). A rather terrifying story.

Ditto on the congratulations! I don’t want to say “good luck” because that might make me seem like coming from a house of divorce makes me dubious of marriage…which it doesn’t, it just makes me grateful that divorce exists…so I just want to say that I hope the two of you are happy for a very, very long time, able to overcome any hardships together, and are able to work out any disagreements or differences that you may have! Yupyup. I’m happy for you! Not that my happiness actually matters in this case. That’s a weird phrase. Um, yeah. Backing away now.

Also ditto what Jaynie said. I love the linkspams. But oh, dear, are they rage-inducing sometimes.

Honestly, I find doing the linkspams really down sometimes — you look back over the week and it’s a world of suck. But!! Sometimes there are really awesome things that I cost on. Like, I’m still pretty jazzed about those New York Santas from earlier this year.

The Clothing 2.0 link made me laugh and depressed me at the same time because it’s so true. Not only does it make me feel like a piece of meat by proxy, it also just sucks all of the believability right out of the world-building.

I KNOW, right? It’d be one thing if they even acknowledged it in world-building, too. Like there’s one seen in David Edding’s books where CNedra gets a really busty chest piece… because she’s 15 and self conscious about how she’s flat. Even then, she gets teased, AND it’s a useful piece of armor… just for someone with bigger boobs!